Add Vars

[m1]

No description provided.

[marcuschaplais]

👍

[jadb]

@m1, please, for the last time, read the guidelines.

FWIW, this package:

• is not widely recommended, well-known, fill a niche nor unique.
• is submitted by it's author even though it doesn't mean the criteria above
• has a typo in submission

I am closing and will not frown-upon future submissions (as suggested in the guidelines), but for now it's a no.

[m1]

@jadb lol sigh. Right, for the first point; It has more downloads on packagist than these previous merges; #556 - #529 (both merged by you)

As for niche or unique, explain? It's kind of meant as a lightweight alternative to zend-config, that's kind of the point of the library.

Also where's the typo?

[marcuschaplais]

@jadb Ditto @m1's point about it being pretty popular, we use it on all our client sites and the openplatform api which gets thousands of hits a day, it's super handy and less fuss than using something like symfony/config

@m1 I think the typo he was talking about was you're missing a comma between PHP and includes

[jadb]

Typo: provder.

[jadb]

@m1, this is going no where.

If @ziadoz or @josegonzalez wish to re-open and include it, I will not oppose it (nothing personal against you), but as far as I am concerned, the guidelines are there for a reason and IMO, this submission doesn't meet them.

[marcuschaplais]

@jadb You didn't really answer any of his questions/points, or even explain why it was closed

[m1]

@marcuschaplais I think I have to open up a new pull request because of a typo 😞

[jadb]

@m1 no need, it could be pushed on top of this one, but that's beside the point.

@marcuschaplais I don't see why I should continue the argument, I gave my comment and if anyone of the other curators would like to revert my decision, they are free to do so.

[marcuschaplais]

@jadb It's not an argument? He was just asking you to explain yourself in terms of the first point he made.

[m1]

@marcuschaplais This has all gone a bit weird. I think I made him mad over this: #560 (comment) which was just a comment on the guidelines for packages. I think this repo needs some active impartial contributors tbh.

[jadb]

@m1, am not mad and am being really impartial. I re-iterate, if others think it should be reverted, I won't oppose it nor defend my case more than I already did.

That was my honest and impartial opinion, but you, understandably so, can't be unbiased (probably why you are feeling it has gone all weird, while I find it normal).

[m1]

@jadb But the thing is, I am being unbiased.

I don't mind if my pull req gets denied for good reason and it gets explained -- it's just that you didn't explain why it got closed

[jadb]

@m1 but I did. You just don't want to understand my point of view and I don't feel like I should (nor would like to make it a norm here) go into details.

The guidelines I contribute time by are clear and I could have just closed this with no explanation (maybe what I should have done not to stir this long time-consuming conversation), based on it being submitted by its author and not meeting criteria.

Please, just let @ziadoz or @josegonzalez check and if they find it should make it, they will revert. Arguing over it won't change the current outcome.

[marcuschaplais]

@jadb The problem @m1 has is that you didn't explain yourself re:

Right, for the first point; It has more downloads on packagist than these previous merges; #556 - #529 (both merged by you)
As for niche or unique, explain? It's kind of meant as a lightweight alternative to zend-config, that's kind of the point of the library.

Also it's just worth pointing out that I'm completely impartial and unbiased, I only commented on this pull request because we use vars at work, like the package and like/watch this repo.

I do feel like @jadb has been a bit strange with this pull request and I don't think the belittling of @m1 helps his case much.

[jadb]

@marcuschaplais I repeat, I will not go into details. I don't have to nor do I think it is fruitful.

Maybe better ask him why the many he had initially submitted were not submitted instead? They are definitely more popular/recommended authors/vendors in the PHP community as well. Or maybe the PR was all started to add 2 personal packages to the list?

[m1]

@jadb Or maybe I was just working my way down the original list I submitted. Think you're being a bit paranoid and petty tbh

[jadb]

@m1 - weird, the zend one you started the new PR serie with was not on the original list you claim to be working your way down.

[m1]

@jadb lol maybe I thought of a new package to add maybe? Maybe just maybe I was going to get round to adding them all?

[marcuschaplais]

@jadb Then why even bother having this project on github at all? Github should be for community projects, with a community input, that's what open source is about.

[jadb]

@m1, well maybe you should have started with the more popular/recommended ones in the PHP community. After all, this is the 'awesome' list not product hunt.

@marcuschaplais - thanks for all your input.

Sorry but I will not be taking part in this discussion anymore.

[marcuschaplais]

@jadb FYI Vars fit my bill but "most popular", "recommended" ones such as symfony/yaml did not. Vars is more lightweight and supports custom loaders.